MSE News: Thousands of Santander mortgage holders could get payouts after blunder

hpoolandy

So was your refusal based on the fact that when your fixed returned to svr you stayed on this rate for x amount of time as they belived you were happy with the rate

almond

Two_steps_forward... wrote: »

The 'happy with the rate' thing seems to be their standard response. I aim to disprove their basis for it over the weekend if I can, PMed Almond with the detail.

thanks got it and replied, if I get chance I will scan my letter and try and copy it on here later just to see if its the same as others

mac24

hpoolandy wrote: »

key facts
a vairiable rate that being abbeys svr currently 7.34 with a discount of 0.01 for 120 months giving a current rate payable 7.33 the interest charged is at all times subject to a minimum rate of 1% this loan is only available to a max of 100% of the propetys valuation

under that it says

after 3/6 2017 interest will be charged at abbeys svr currently 7.34 for the remaining term of the mortgage

please excuse any errors in the txt

Forgive me Hpoolandy I have a few questions. Are you saying that you were tied to your SVR after your fixed rate because the were offering you the very generous discount of 0.01% off of their normal SVR?

You actually had an ERC linked to this second part?

Are you still on it?

hpoolandy

When i took out the loan they said it could not be fixed as the main part so would be svr the way iv always took it is that the loan could not be fixed at any time and would run its course untill 2017 following the svr less 0.01% as a discounted offer for 120 months
i can remember him saying with it only being a small loan i wouldnt really notice if the svr go up
when i checked my 2007 statement last night it had went up by 0.5 % in the first 3 months of taking out the loan

TJI999

I'm still at a bit of a loss as to how to complain to the Ombudsman.
My refusal is also based on the fact that I did not change mortgages when I could have (ie when reverting to the SVR rate).
How much detail will the Ombudsman need. I don't know what other deals were around at the time because I wasn't looking. That's the whole point - we weren't shopping around as we were either not informed or misinformed.

crusaderstyle

http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/any-other-business/5530558/santander-the-bank-that-escaped-the-credit-crunch

This article from 2009 isn't about a specific mortgage but is more of an article about how santander was appearing to ride the recession easily compared to similar banking institutions.

I've been pondering with the idea that santander seem to deliberately manipulate some customers into financially difficult positions with regard to their mortgages. Seems that back in 2009 santander were buying up lots of properties to be sold through their own estate agents offering their own mortgage packages. The houses they bought can only be repossessions or those whereby people were pushed into giving the keys back? Talk about benefitting from another's bad situation!

Just gives us something else to consider maybe? Ties in with why and when they increased the cap margin too.

crusaderstyle

http://www.aboutsantander.co.uk/media/42133/2011%20annual%20report%20on%20form%2020-f.pdf

Santanders 2011 annual report. Apologies if it was already linked to earlier in the thread. I've lost track!

I'm still ploughing through this, but I though it would give us an insight into where they were at that time. I've chosen this annual report to see if it gives any hint they would be needing to increase the svr in 2012.

Overall I'm just trying to get a feel of what decisions santander were making in relation to all other factors ie housing markets, arrears etc over the period of 2008 until current. Maybe we could get a santander timeline going so that we can use our argument alongside facts relating to their position too? There may be some interesting correlations that will strengthen what we suffered as a result of their decisions (specifically increasing the cap of course!) and the subsequent lack of notification about it.

I personally think this could also strengthen the argument that the lack of notification was infact intentional and not a massive oversight. They say in their original 'affected but unaffected' letters they detail that 'they didn't make the cap increase clear' and that some customers 'weren't informed at all'. I don't think ANY customers were informed back in 2008 but please let me know if you did get a letter and I'll put that one to bed!

TheMightySwordfish

Maybe start the timeline on Google Documents and link in to here.

crusaderstyle

TheMightySwordfish wrote: »

Maybe start the timeline on Google Documents and link in to here.

For anyone that does think this idea could be useful it would best be used in conjunction with your own timeline detailing your own positions throughout the timescale 2008-current. Everyone is different of course so maybe their timeline would be from the date of the mortgage deal they were on that led them to having a balance with them in December 2008.

crusaderstyle

Two_steps_forward... wrote: »

I will have to familiarise myself myself with Google docs. And all of Glastonbury to watch too!

You enjoy watching Glastonbury! I'm going to look into this too.